Cross-Linguistic Variation in Object Marking

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Cross-Linguistic Variation in Object Marking Cross-linguistic Variation in Object Marking Published by LOT phone: +31 30 253 6006 Janskerkhof 13 fax: +31 30 253 6406 3512 BL Utrecht e-mail: [email protected] The Netherlands http://www.lotschool.nl Cover illustration: detail of Polderland by Hennie de Swart (2004) ISBN 978-90-78328-39-1 NUR 616 Copyright c 2007: Peter de Swart. All rights reserved. The work in this dissertation has been funded by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), grant 220-70-003. Cross-linguistic Variation in Object Marking een wetenschappelijke proeve op het gebied van de Letteren Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. mr. S.C.J.J. Kortmann, volgens besluit van het College van Decanen in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 21 november 2007 om 10.30 uur precies door Petrus Jacobus Franciscus de Swart geboren op 23 augustus 1981 te Nijmegen Promotor: Prof. dr. P.C. Muysken Copromotor: Mw. dr. H. de Hoop Manuscriptcommissie: Mw. prof. dr. J. Aissen (University of California at Santa Cruz) Mw. prof. dr. A.C.M. van Kemenade Mw. prof. dr. B. Primus (Universit¨atzu K¨oln) Acknowledgements Being a fan of the genre of acknowledgements, I am hesitant to add my contribution to it. Although the work of a single person, this thesis could not have been written without the support and friendship of others. I would like to single out a few of them. This project could not have been carried out without the financial support of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) to the PIONIER Project Case Cross-linguistically [grant 220-70-003] which is gratefully acknowledged. I have felt very privileged over the past few years to have Helen de Hoop as my daily supervisor, and I am afraid there is no ‘thank you’ big enough that it can make up for everything she has given me. From the very first moment until the last seconds of my PhD project she has given me trust, support, and advice, engaged in discussion, provided written feedback with a speed and accuracy way beyond the call of duty, and opened numerous opportunities and possibilities for me. I could not have wished myself a better start of my scientific career than she has given me and I can only be extremely thankful for that. I am also happy to thank my promotor Pieter Muysken whose advice, comments, and questions helped me to put things in a wider perspective and to improve this thesis. Judith Aissen, Ans van Kemenade, and Beatrice Primus agreed to be the members of my thesis committee. I would like to thank them for reading the manuscript and for their stimulating comments. As a member of the PIONIER Project and the research group Optimal Communication I have received the friendship, support, and feedback of my fellow team members Geertje van Bergen, Ad Foolen, Richard van Gerrevink, Luuc van der Horst, Lotte Hogeweg, Irene Kr¨amer, Leonid Kulikov, Monique Lamers, Sander Lestrade, Andrej Malchukov, Kees de Schepper, Yang Ning, and Joost Zwarts. It has been a real pleasure to have you as my closest colleagues. Special thanks go to Luuc for his help in compiling the bibliography. Over the past few years I have met a great number of people, a few of whom I would like to thank explicitly for their help: Ellen Woolford, vi Martina Wiltschko, Leon Stassen, Lilja Øvrelid, Yukiko Morimoto, Jak- lin Kornfilt, Hans-Martin G¨artner, Marco Garc´ıaGarc´ıa,Henry Davis, Miriam Butt, and Mengistu Amberber. Family and friends are thanked for their (non-linguistic) interest and support. In particular, Emar for his close friendship in and out of academia, and all the gossip we have shared. The Steigertijgers of the Steigertheater have provided me with a second life which allowed me to occasionally forget all about linguistics. And Corien. I don’t even know where to start. Contents Acknowledgements v Abbreviations ix Abstract xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Grades of Transitivity . 2 1.2 Animacy and Ambiguity Avoidance . 3 1.3 Prominence . 5 2 Gradient Transitivity 7 2.1 Introduction . 7 2.1.1 Intransitivity . 8 2.1.2 Transitivity . 11 2.1.3 (In)transitivity . 14 2.2 Transitivity in Generative Grammar . 21 2.3 Transitivity As a Gradient Phenomenon . 26 2.3.1 Hopper and Thompson (1980) . 26 2.3.2 The Relation between Meaning and Form . 32 2.4 Cognate Objects and the Syntax-Semantics Interface . 33 2.4.1 Ingredients of the Cognate Object Construction in English . 34 2.4.2 The Semantic Status of Cognate Objects . 45 2.4.3 The Syntactic Status of Cognate Objects . 50 2.4.4 A Cross-Linguistic Perspective . 60 2.5 Conclusions . 70 3 Recovering Grammatical Roles 73 3.1 Introduction . 73 3.2 Case Distinguishability . 87 3.2.1 Bidirectionality and Avoid Ambiguity . 92 viii Contents 3.3 Recoverability: Alternative Strategies . 99 3.3.1 One Nominal Interpretation and Bias ....... 106 3.4 Word Order and Exceptional Case Marking . 116 3.5 Recoverability vs. Prominence . 126 3.6 Conclusions . 134 4 The Prominence Factor 135 4.1 Introduction . 135 4.2 Prominence Categories . 137 4.2.1 Prominence Hierarchies . 149 4.3 Cross-Modularity in Active to Passive Alternations . 157 4.4 Differential Object Marking: Animacy vs. Definiteness . 173 4.4.1 Animacy vs. Definiteness/Specificity . 181 4.4.2 Split vs. Fluid Case Alternations . 185 4.5 Conclusions . 194 5 Conclusions 197 Bibliography 201 Samenvatting (Summary in Dutch) 229 Curriculum Vitae 235 Abbreviations 1, 2, 3 first, second, third person abl ablative abs absolutive acc accusative adel adelative adr addressee ag agent agr agreement aor aorist anim animate antp antipassive at agent topic aux auxiliary cl classifier com commitative con connective cp completive aspect dat dative decl declarative def definite dem demonstrative det determiner dln delineator emph emphatic pronoun erg ergative exp experiencer f feminine fac factive fin finite foc focus marker fut future gen genitive x Abbreviations hum human imp imperfective ind indicative inf infinitive instr instrumental intr intransitive inv inverse invol non-volitional io indirect object lc lack of control loc locative m masculine nc non-control nmz nominalizer ntr neuter nom nominative npst non-past obj object obl oblique obv obviative ocl object clitic opt optative part partitive pass passive pat patient pf perfective pl plural prs present prt particle pst past ptc participle rl relativizer sbj subjunctive sg singular sim singular imperative clause marker st stative sti stimulus su subject thm theme tr transitive vol volitional xi Classical Authors The following abbreviations are used to refer to classical authors and their works: Antiph. Tetr. Antiphon Tetralogiae Plaut. Pseud. Plautus Pseudolus Pl. Ap. Plato Apologia Sall. Cat. Sallustius De Catilinae coniuratione Xen. An. Xenophon Anabasis xii Abbreviations Abstract This dissertation deals with the relation between form and meaning in the domain of transitivity, in particular with respect to the cross-linguistic phenomenon of differential object marking. Transitive sentences are sen- tences with a two-place predicate (verb) that takes two arguments, a subject and an object. Languages may differ, however, in how they map semantic (in)transitivity to syntactic (in)transitivity. There are construc- tions that are transitive from a semantic point of view, as they involve two participants (arguments), while they can be argued to be intransitive from a syntactic point of view. Examples are passive, antipassive, and object incorporation constructions. The same can be observed for seman- tically intransitive constructions that come out as syntactically transitive. In particular, I will argue in chapter 2 that cognate object constructions are semantically intransitive, yet in many languages get mapped to syn- tactically transitive constructions. I will present a fine-grained approach to transitivity that can deal with one-to-many and many-to-one mappings between meaning and form. Differential object marking, which is the central domain of investi- gation in this thesis, also involves a shift in transitivity, since sentences with caseless objects can be argued to be syntactically less transitive than those with case-marked ones. One explanation of differential ob- ject marking phenomena lies in the problem of ambiguity: a speaker may case mark a direct object in order to ensure recoverability of the intended interpretation on the side of the hearer. Avoidance of ambiguity as a speaker’s strategy can explain why some instantiations of object marking are not driven by semantic or syntactic features of the object per se, but by these features in relation to the features of the subject. In chapter 3 I will present an asymmetric speaker’s model of bidirectional optimiza- tion, in order to account for this strategy of case-marking. Clearly not all instantiations of differential object marking can be explained in terms of recoverability, however. Towards the end of the chapter I will show how a language can develop a strategy to mark all and only prominent objects out of a strategy of ambiguity avoidance. xiv Abstract This latter strategy of mere prominence marking is further investi- gated in chapter 4. In the literature both animacy and definiteness/- specificity are claimed to be features of the object that trigger case mark- ing in differential object marking languages. Both features can be sub- sumed under the notion of prominence. Animate and definite/specific objects are more prominent than inanimate and indefinite/non-specific ones. I will argue, however, that animacy and definiteness/specificity each play a radically different role when it comes to differential object marking. While case-marking can change the hearer’s interpretation of the definiteness or specificity of an object, it cannot change the animacy of the object.
Recommended publications
  • A Dimasa Grammar
    F. Jacquesson with the kind help of G.K. Thaosen A Dimasa Grammar Contents Acknowledgments 5 Glosses 7 Sentence types 9 Verbs 20 Nouns 40 Pronouns 52 Numerals and Classifiers 55 Observations on lexicon 57 Acknowledgements and history of the essay This study began, years ago, in Haflong with the very kind help of G. K. Thaosen. Most of the information here provided comes from him. Other details came later, either from Bikash Roy Debbarma when in Agartala, or from Uttam Bathari and friends when we travelled together (March 2007) to record Dimasa dialects. To have a look at this later work, see: Jacquesson François. 2006. La reconstruction linguistique du passé : le cas des langues boro- garo , Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, 101/1, 273-302. On the whole I devoted some time to the variants of Dimasa. I think I could show (see above) François Jacquesson June 2008. Glosses see A Agent Abl 3.4.5. Ablative : -ni-praŋ Acc 3.4.2. Accusative : -ke Adj 2.3. Adjective prefix : gV- Apt 2.2.3.2.3. Actual Present : -du Ass 2.2.3.2.2. Assertive : -bi Aux Auxiliary verb Cl 5.2. Classifier (with number) Cnt 2.2.1.4. Continuative : -sai- Com 2.2.2.4. Comitative-Reflexive : -pa- D 3.3. determinative, genitive : -ni Dat 3.4.8. Dative : -ne, -tane Def 2.2.4. Negative imperative : da²- Dis 2.2.1.1. Distal : -ha- Dw 2.2.1.3. from up down : -klei- Ela 3.4.5. Elative : -ni-ha² Emp 2.2.3.2.11 Emphatic particle : ti Exs 1.2.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying and Expanding Role and Reference Grammar
    Applying and Expanding Role and Reference Grammar Rolf Kailuweit, Lisann Künkel, Eva Staudinger NIHIN Studies This volume is released under the terms of the Creative Commons Licence https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ Website links in this book All website links mentioned in this book were operational at the time of publishing. Publica- tions available on the Role and Reference Grammar website are referenced as “available on RRG website”, and no links are provided. At the time of publication, the RRG website was accessible at http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~rrgpage/rrg.html. List of abbreviations ABS absolutive case DET determiner ACC accusative case DIR directional ADJ adjective DM discourse marker ADV adverb DL dual AFFIR affirmative DOB direct object ALL allative case DOM differential object marking ANTI antipassive ERG ergative case ARG argument EVQ event quantification ART article EXL exclusive ASP aspect F feminine AUX auxiliary verb FOC focus CH case hierarchy FUT future CLD clitic left dislocation GEN genitive case CLI clitic IF illocutionary force CLM clause linkage marker INT intensifier COM comitative IO indirect object COMP comparative IMP imperative COMPL completive IPFV imperfective aspect COND conditional IMPS impersonal CONJ conjunction INAN inanimate CONT continuous INC inclusive COP copula INE inessive case DAT dative case INF infinitive DCA domain of case assignment INGR ingressive DCM differential case marking INS instrument/instrumental DEIC deictic INT intensifier DEM demonstrative KP kontrast position DES desiderative
    [Show full text]
  • Cognate Object Constructions In
    COGNATE OBJECT CONSTRUCTIONS IN MSA A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities 2017 Safiah A. Y. Madkhali SCHOOL OF ARTS, LANGUAGES AND CULTURES CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………….7 LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………...7 ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………...8 DECLARATION……………………………………………………………..……………9 COPYRIGHT STATEMENT……………………………………………………………10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………...11 GLOSSING CONVENTIONS…………………………………………………………..12 TRANSLITERATION SYMBOLS………………………………………………………13 Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 14 1.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………….14 1.2. Modern Standard Arabic……………………………………………………...17 1.3. The Data………………………………………………………………………...18 1.4. Cognate Object Constructions………………………………………………..20 1.4.1. Delimitation of the Concept .............................................................................. 20 1.4.1.1 Morphological Criterion ..................................................................... 20 1.4.1.2 Semantic Criteria .................................................................................. 21 1.4.1.3 Syntactic Criteria .................................................................................. 25 1.4.1.4 Categories of Cognate Objects ........................................................... 28 1.4.1.5 Delimitation of the Concept in MSA ................................................. 33 1.4.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Te Reo the Journal of the Linguistic Society of New Zealand
    Te Reo the Journal of the Linguistic Society of New Zealand Volume 62 Issue 1 (Special Issue): Issue in Honour of Frantisek Lichtenberk Research Article 2019 pp. 93–115 September 2019 Indexing and flagging, and head and dependent marking Martin Haspelmath Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Linguistic and Cultural Evolution (Jena) This paper is a peer-reviewed contribution from https://www.nzlingsoc.org/journal/current-issue/ ©Te Reo – The Journal of the Linguistic Society of New Zealand Guest Editors: Andreea S. Calude & Suzanne Kemmer Martin Haspelmath 93 Indexing and flagging, and head and dependent marking Martin Haspelmath Abstract This paper compares the concept pair indexing/flagging with the well-known concept pair head/dependent marking that is widely used in typology. It shows that a general concept of flagging (comprising case and adpositional marking) is needed, and it sketches the advantages of the indexing concept over the older idea of “person agreement”. It then points out that the notions of head and dependent are hard to define (apart from the two basic domains of clauses and nominals), and that the head/dependent marking typology does not take the function of syntactic relation markers into account. On a functional view, both flags and indexes can be seen as role- identifiers, as opposed to concordants (attributive agreement markers). After discussing three further issues with the head/dependent marking typology, involving construct markers, concordants, and cross-indexes, I conclude that the concept pair indexing/flagging is more suitable for typological purposes than head/dependent marking. Keywords argument indexing, flagging, head marking, dependent marking, case marking, adpositions, language typology 1 Comparative concepts for cross-linguistic grammatical comparison Over the last few decades, we have come to understand the extent of the grammatical differences between languages much better, due in large measure to our ability to compare language structures through comparative concepts.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Variations Among On-Reserve First Nations
    SPEECH VARIATIONS IN FIRST NATIONS KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN ACROSS CANADA by Anne Laurie BA., Concordia University, 2014 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master’s of Interdisciplinary Studies in the Graduate Academic Unit of School of Graduate Studies Supervisor: J. Douglas Willms, PhD, Faculty of Education Committee: Lucia Tramonte, PhD, Faculty of Sociology Renée Bourgoin, PhD, Faculty of Education Examining Board: Mary McKenna, PhD, Assistant Dean of Graduate Studies, Chair Elizabeth Sloat, PhD, Faculty of Education Elaine Perunovic, PhD, Faculty of Psychology This thesis is accepted by the Dean of Graduate Studies THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK September, 2016 © Anne Laurie, 2016 SPEECH VARIATIONS IN FIRST NATIONS Abstract The purpose of the study was to investigate the extent to which speech errors made by First Nations children compared with those of a non-Aboriginal population, and how the errors were related to a common heritage language background, age, gender, and English as a second language. Speech errors were determined by administering the Diagnostic Evaluation for Articulation and Phonology’s Diagnostic Screen in 374 kindergarten children on Cree, Dene, Ojibway, Maliseet, Mi’kmaq, and Innu reservations across Canada. The data were analyzed using statistical techniques, and in particular logistic and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regressions. Results of the regression models revealed that the types of speech errors differed by gender, significantly favouring boys in four speech error occurrences. English as a second language was a significant factor and more prevalent in one speech error for both Cree L1 children and Innu L1 children, relative to their respective heritage language background.
    [Show full text]
  • CLIPP Christiani Lehmanni Inedita, Publicanda, Publicata Pleonasm and Hypercharacterization
    CLIPP Christiani Lehmanni inedita, publicanda, publicata titulus Pleonasm and hypercharacterization huius textus situs retis mundialis http://www.uni-erfurt.de/ sprachwissenschaft/personal/lehmann/CL_Publ/ Hypercharacterization.pdf dies manuscripti postremum modificati 23.02.2006 occasio orationis habitae 11. Internationale Morphologietagung Wien, 14.-17.02.2004 volumen publicationem continens Booij, Geert E. & van Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 2005. Heidelberg: Springer annus publicationis 2005 paginae 119-154 Pleonasm and hypercharacterization Christian Lehmann University of Erfurt Abstract Hypercharacterization is understood as pleonasm at the level of grammar. A scale of strength of pleonasm is set up by the criteria of entailment, usualness and contrast. Hy- percharacterized constructions in the areas of syntax, inflection and derivation are ana- lyzed by these criteria. The theoretical basis of a satisfactory account is sought in a holis- tic, rather than analytic, approach to linguistic structure, where an operator-operand struc- ture is formed by considering the nature of the result, not of the operand. Data are drawn from German, English and a couple of other languages. The most thorough in a number of more or less sketchy case studies is concerned with German abstract nouns derived in -ierung (section 3.3.1). This process is currently so productive that it is also used to hy- percharacterize nouns that are already marked as nominalizations. 1 1. Introduction Hypercharacterization 2 (German Übercharakterisierung) may be introduced per ostensionem: it is visible in expressions such as those of the second column of T1. T1. Stock examples of hypercharacterization language hypercharacterized basic surplus element German der einzigste ‘the most only’ der einzige ‘the only’ superlative suffix –st Old English children , brethren childer , brether plural suffix –en While it is easy, with the help of such examples, to understand the term and get a feeling for the concept ‘hypercharacterization’, a precise definition is not so easy.
    [Show full text]
  • Problems in Defining a Prototypical Transitive Sentence Typologically
    PROBLEMS IN DEFINING A PROTOTYPICAL TRANSITIVE SENTENCE TYPOLOGICALLY Seppo Kittilei Department of General Linguistics Horttokuja 2 20014 University of Turku FINLAND Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT This paper is trying to show that the concept of the prototypical transitive sentence is very useful in the study of transitivity, but is as such not so unproblematic as has often been assumed. This is achieved by presenting examples from different languages that show the weaknesses of the "traditional" prototype. The prototype proposed here remains, however, a tentative one, because there are so many properties that cannot be described typologically because of their language-specific nature. 1. INTRODUCTION Transitivity has been defined in many different ways during the history of linguistics. Traditionally transitivity was understood to be a semantic phenomenon: Transitive sentences were sentences which describe events that involve a transfer of energy from subject to object (e.g. 'he killed the man'). Structurally these are mostly sentences with a grammatical subject and a direct (accusative) object (at least in the languages that were the targets of description). In the golden era of formal grammars transitivity became a purely formal concept: Verbs (or more rarely sentences) with a direct object were classified as transitive and those without one as intransitive without taking their semantics into account (see e.g. Jacobsen 1985:89 [4]). Formal definitions very rarely allow any intermediate forms, i.e. every transitive sentence is equally prototypical (because there are no adequate criteria by means of which the prototypicality could be measured). Therefore, the concept of a prototypical transitive sentence is irrelevant in the formal descriptions.
    [Show full text]
  • Ojibwe and Dakota Relations: a Modern Ojibwe Perspective Through
    Ojibwe miinawa Bwaanag Wiijigaabawitaadiwinan (Ojibwe and Dakota Relations) A Modern Ojibwe Perspective Through Oral History Ojibwe miinawa Bwaanag Wiijigaabawitaadiwinan (Ojibwe and Dakota Relations) A Modern Ojibwe Perspective Through Oral History Jason T. Schlender, History Joel Sipress, Ph.D, Department of Social Inquiry ABSTRACT People have tried to write American Indian history as the history of relations between tribes and non-Indians. What is important is to have the history of the Ojibwe and Dakota relationships conveyed with their own thoughts. This is important because it shows the vitality of Ojibwe oral history conveyed in their language and expressing their own views. The stories and recollections offer a different lens to view the world of the Ojibwe. A place few people have looked at in order to understand the complicated web of relationships that Ojibwe and Dakota have with one another. Niibowa bwaanag omaa gii-taawag. Miish igo gii-maajinizhikawaawaad iwidi mashkodeng. Mashkodeng gii-izhinaazhikawaad iniw bwaanan, akina. Miish akina imaa Minisooding gii-nagadamowaad mitigokaag, aanjigoziwaad. Mii sa naagaj, mii i’iw gaa- izhi-zagaswe’idiwaad ingiw bwaanag, ingiw anishinaabeg igaye. Gaawiin geyaabi wii- miigaadisiiwag, wiijikiwendiwaad. A lot of Sioux lived here. Then they chased them out to the prairies, all of them. They [were forced] to move and abandon the forests there in Minnesota. But later on, they had a [pipe] ceremony, the Sioux and Chippewa too. They didn’t fight anymore, [and] made friends.1 Introduction (Maadaajimo) There is awareness of a long history, in more modern times, a playful lack of trust between the Ojibwe and Dakota. Historians like William Warren documented Ojibwe life while Samuel Pond did the same with the Dakota.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Structure and Object Marking: a Study Of
    INFORMATION STRUCTURE AND OBJECT MARKING: A STUDY OF THE OBJECT PREPOSITION ʾET IN BIBLICAL HEBREW A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES HEBREW UNION COLLEGE—JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION BY PETER JOSEPH BEKINS IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ________________________________ First Reader: Dr. Stephen A. Kaufman ________________________________ Second Reader: Dr. W. Randall Garr NOVEMBER 2012 © Copyright by Peter Joseph Bekins 2012 All rights reserved Acknowledgements I would like to begin by thanking my readers for their tireless work. My advisor, Stephen Kaufman, was everything that one could ask for in a first reader—direct and quick. I have benefited greatly from my years studying under him and completing this project with him. My second reader, Randall Garr, graciously took on this project despite the fact that we had never previously spoken, much less met. He proved to be the perfect complement with an eye to detail, and this work was improved immeasurably by his participation. I would like to thank my professors and colleagues at Hebrew Union College—Jewish Institute of Religion. The faculty of the graduate school, including Sam Greengus, David Weisberg !"#, Nili Fox, David Aaron, Jason Kalman, and Adam Kamesar, have all contributed to my growth as a scholar and a person. I thank my fellow graduate students for their friendship, fellowship, and encouragement. I would like to thank the other scholars who have taken an interest in my work and provided both support and encouragement. Robert Holmstedt and John Hobbins have given feedback and encouragement in various stages of the project.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cognate Accusative in the Holy Quran and the Methods of Compensation* المفعول المطلق في القرآن الكريم وأساليب اإلحاطة بالشكل والمضمون
    An - Najah Univ. J. Res. (Humanities). Vol. 30(10), 2016 The Cognate Accusative in the Holy Quran and the Methods of Compensation* المفعول المطلق في القرآن الكريم وأساليب اﻹحاطة بالشكل والمضمون Wala’a Ya’aqbah وﻻء يعاقبة Language Center, Arab American University, Jenin, Palestine E-mail: [email protected] Received: (20/11/2015), Accepted: (12/5/2016) Abstract This study discusses the problem of translating the cognate accusative (CA) from Arabic into English. It also studies whether the translations studied achieve the optimal pragmatic meaning and force. It attempts to discover how cognate accusatives in the Holy Qur'an have been dealt with in translations done by a number of professional translators. In this study, the researcher will compare the different translations done by different translators, as Mohammad Muhsin Khan, Yusuf Ali, Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall and Zaid Shakir. The aim is to discover how the cognate accusative has been dealt with; hence, the study will be involved in the basis of direct and indirect translation approaches to show how the translators manage to semantically and pragmatically render the source cognate accusative in the target language, the ensuing loss of meaning and ways of compensation. The study is to be empirical, analytical, and comparative, in the sense that it intends to observe the translators' decision-making in rendering the source text in the target language, whether they follow the direct or indirect translations to render the meaning in the target language. It also * This paper is submitted to the conference titled “Translation a Tool for Connection or Separation”. ”...... The Cognate Accusative in the“ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ 2058 studies whether the translations achieve the optimal meaning and force, both linguistically and pragmatically.
    [Show full text]
  • The Turkic Languages the Structure of Turkic
    This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 27 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK The Turkic Languages Lars Johanson, Éva Á. Csató The Structure of Turkic Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203066102.ch3 Lars Johanson Published online on: 21 May 1998 How to cite :- Lars Johanson. 21 May 1998, The Structure of Turkic from: The Turkic Languages Routledge Accessed on: 27 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203066102.ch3 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. 3 The Structure 0/ Turkic Lars lohanson Introduction Throughout their history and in spite of their huge area of distribution, Turkic languages share essential structural features. Many of them are common to Eurasian languages of the Altaic and Uralic types. While often dealt with in typologically oriented linguistic work, most aspects of Turkic structure still call for more unbiased and differentiated description.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistics, 42: 2, 2004, 247-291
    Linguistics, 42: 2, 2004, 247-291 Actants in Semantics and Syntax. II. Actants in Syntax IGOR MEL’ČUK Part II of the paper deals with deep-syntactic and surface-syntactic actants. A deep-syntactic actant slot is defined by its correspondence to a semantic actant slot; a deep-syntactic actant of a lexical unit L either fills a deep-syntactic slot of L or corresponds to a surface-syntactic actant of L. The paper discusses the numbering of deep-syntactic actant slots, some problematic cases of such numbering, restrictions on the surface realizations of deep-syntactic actant slots, and the ways to change the active deep-syntactic valence of a given lexical unit. Surface-syntactic actants are defined inductively—by bundles of relevant syntactic properties that a clause element shares with an established surface- syntactic actant, such as the Subject or the Direct Object. The problem of “Actants vs. Circumstantials” is considered, including the DO SO test. The correspondence between semantic, deep- syntactic and surface-syntactic actant slots of a lexical unit is characterized, with special attention to the four cases of discrepancy between them. The concept of Government Pattern of a lexical unit L is introduced and illustrated. After the notion of Semantic Actant has been clarified in Part I of this article, I can move to actants in syntax. As stated in Section 2, Part I, an important feature of my approach is a systematic distinction between Deep- and Surface-Syntactic actants/actant slots. Therefore, I start with an examination of Deep-Syntactic Actants (Section 4), to continue with SSyntAs (Section 5), after which a survey of possible correspondences between actants of the three types is presented (Section 6); finally, the Government Pattern is characterized (Section 7).
    [Show full text]